This week I would like to talk about the furore surrounding one Mr. Paolo Di Canio. He has recently moved managerial positions from Swindon Town to Sunderland. He left Swindon citing mistreatment from the Board, including the sale of Matt Ritchie behind his back.

At Swindon, Di Canio managed to get the team out of League Two and was doing well in League One. As such I can’t help but sit here and give him my admiration for somebody who is obviously a great football manager. 

Now we’re up to date we can talk about the issue over which a certain David Miliband has resigned. Miliband was Sunderland’s vice-chairman and was also a non-executive director. A similar thing occurred when Di Canio started at Swindon when the GMB withdrew its sponsorship, citing his political views.

Every single person who is upset with his political views seemingly keeps on stating the same thing – that these views have no place in football. So why can’t these people practice what they preach? He was fined in 2005 for performing three facist salutes in a game for Lazio. He was never fined again. 

So why are we holding him up as some kind of needful paragon of democratic process? He supports fascism, a lot of people have. Get over it, he hasn’t rammed his views down anyone’s throats since 2005, now stop ramming yours down his.

For my two cents I think that he is a brilliant man - a journalist’s wet dream. He’s pushed over a referee while playing against Arsenal while with Sheffield Wednesday, and earned the enmity of Wimbledon fans in 2000 with what could be arguably hailed as one of the most physics defying goals ever (seriously, youtube it – it’s literally unbelievable). This year he bought fans who turned out to clear the snow off the pitch, pizza in thanks. In September, he subbed his keeper after he let in two goals in twenty minutes. From all of this I can only see a crazy Italian who has huge passion for football. He offered to spend £30,000 of his own money to keep players at Swindon. Sure he may be a fascist, but as long as he keeps to football and keeps schtum about it, let’s cut out the stick. 

It’s a freedom we enjoy to have political views or to quit over the appointment of a talented manager who happens not to vote for your brother’s party but I know which I think is the worse crime.

Photo Credit: University of Bath Tri Club

Written by: Emily Hogge

At 7am Wednesday 13th March the chatter of voices and whirring of tires could be heard outside the library, as distant splashes rang out from the pool and the first murmur of pounding feet emanated around the Bath university campus. 

The challenge had been set, the goal was clear and the next 18 hours would determine the outcome. As the early risers climbed off the bus or stumbled out off their houses looks of confusion spread across their faces as a red blur disappeared around the corner and a red glow lit up the library. For the triathlon team it was the start of what was to be an immense challenge.

17 hours and 30 minutes later the last pedal stroke was turned amidst cheers and cries of satisfaction – the challenge was complete! Tired bodies collapsed onto the floor, smiles broke out across their faces and laughter and singing emanated around the dark and cold campus. 79.1km swum in the pool, 913km run and over 3240km cycled - the challenge had been smashed, a truly incredible achievement.

All 50 of the triathletes who took part gave 100% pushing themselves to the limit. They all went way beyond the call of duty. It was incredible to watch, to witness the determination and commitment of the human mind and body. It was remarkable to feel the sense of loyalty and dedication to the cause – to see the belief and hear the excitement about the work of The Zoe Trust and share in people’s enthusiasm for the future of our children. 

There were some remarkable efforts; Dan Thorby completed an IronMan triathlon and Mary Bird ¾ of an IronMan in around 14 hours – they are true heroes, both so close to breaking point yet determined to fight on.  Some other fantastic efforts were by Daniel Moorland, Lucy Harvey and Joshua Doran who completed their first Olympic distance triathlons. But I wish I could mention every one of the triathletes who took part because they were all amazing and showed such determination and courage. 

With £3302.35 currently raised and more still being donated it has been an extremely successful challenge. But more than the money it was so exciting to see people pushing themselves to the limit for a great cause, to hear the triumphant tales and stories of the day – to see the pleasure and the pride of the athletes. Watching people enjoy getting involved in the work that we are doing was wonderful and I hope that in the future they will remember The Zoe Trust name and come and join us in our fight to give our children a brighter future.  

On behalf of the Zoe Trust I would like to say a huge heartfelt thank you to everyone who took part, our wonderful supporters and to everyone who dug deep and sponsored us. Also thank you to the University of Bath Students’ Union for their support and help. 

Written by Matthew Powell

April at the University of Bath. Many things happen at this time – our brief glimpse of the sun is one. Another is awards season. If you have made a sizeable commitment to university sport over the length of your course then there is a chance that you could be eligible for a Blues Award. 

The majority of these awards are in recognition of “achievement, performance and commitment.” There are a few extra special awards for clubs, teams or committee members who have gone above and beyond the call of duty in their execution of services for the university. 

There are three levels of standard award that the University gives out: a Full Blue for being in a University first team and a national team simultaneously for two years, a Half Blue for playing for a first team for two years and having junior international representation or a BUCS podium finish and Colours for playing for a University team for two to three years. 

This year the entire process was hindered by an administrative error by Bath University Computing Services. The error was caused by a mailbox reaching its quota and therefore emails containing nominations bounced. It was not known at what stage the mailbox reached its quota and therefore SU Sport were not aware of the point at which the nominations were lost. 

When SU Sport realised that there had been applications that had not been received they extended the application process for awards for a further four days past the original deadline. This was based upon advice received from BUCS which stated that affected students would receive an undelivered email notice; however it appears that individuals did not receive this failure notice. The clarity of the original email was also brought into question, as it appears that some members of sports clubs merely thought it was an extension to the original deadline for those that had not already applied, rather than the opportunity to resubmit nomination forms.

It was at this point that various complaints were made to the bathimpact team and as such we contacted SU Sport Officer Jon Gleave, who informed us that the SU Sport team had been investigating a potential solution to the issue from the point at which they received the first complaint on the 29th March. 

Unfortunately due to the Easter Break, the response time took longer as several key members of the Blues Awards Committee were on annual leave and as such couldn’t convene. 

Working with the Blues Awards Committee, SU Sport managed to arrange for nominations to be resubmitted for those individuals that were affected. Appropriately, it was necessary for those individuals to prove that they had submitted a nomination before the original deadline.

Alex Grounds, a member of the Hockey Committee said of SU Sport’s response: “It is nice to see that the people that deserve recognition, shall not be deprived of the chance of an award due to somebody else’s mistake.” 

It is important however to remember that due to this error we have all been overlooking the reason behind the awards themselves – to thank the men and women who take part in sport at the University of Bath and who strive to perform to the best of their abilities week in week out for the furtherance of our university’s reputation. 

It is supposed to be a time of celebration and recognition and it so nearly turned into one of diasappointment, although with the solutions put into place, hopefully there will be less people left disappointed.

Hopefully the action taken by SU Sport has helped to resolve the situation as originally we were made aware of 23 members of one particular Sports Club being deprived of the opportunity to be recognised for their sporting commitment.

If you have missed the opportunity to be nominated for a Blues Award, please be aware that it is possible to apply again next year.

by Rowan Emslie

There is a certain, unfortunate breed of mouse that is incredibly prone to addiction. It will forsake water for alcohol, it won’t contain itself around drugs, it will abandon almost all other activities to run around and get high all day. This type of mouse is coveted by scientists who wish to study the effects of addiction – how the brain and behaviour are altered, or how to improve the ‘cold turkey’ period. Destructive personality traits are not the preserve of humans alone.

Animal research generates a lot of ire. Facilities have been targeted by arsonists and bomb makers and researchers have been sent death threats and suffered violent, personal attacks. People all over the world are passionate about animal rights; this passion sometimes spills over into aggression and violence. Understandably, many researchers are reluctant to publicly highlight their work and facilities are often shrouded in secrecy as well as huge security measures.

I was only dimly aware of the animal research that happens at the University of Bath. I had heard vague assertions from friends which were never followed up with any hard facts. How did they know about these things? Were they involved? What was being tested? This year, my position at bathimpact, with a lot of help from the University and faculty, has granted access to some of these facilities to gather some real information.

WHAT I SAW, WHAT I LEARNED
The facility itself is licensed by the Home Office, as are the ‘Project Leaders’ who are responsible for particular studies and, below these, ‘Personal Licences’ which are required for any contributors to those studies. If, at any time, anybody is found to have contravened the enormous amount of regulations surrounding animal research – mistreatment of animals in any way, going beyond the remit of your particular license – the offender could be black-listed for life, depending on the severity of the misdemeanour. Not only is animal welfare vital for good science, I am told, it is very much in the interest of the careers of the professionals who work there.

The vast majority of the testing at this facility is considered ‘mild’
– the lowest Home Office rating for animal suffering. Some minor
surgery is performed, under anaesthesia and pain killers. In other studies the animals are also treated with addictive drugs. Many of the experiments focus on behavioural changes under drug treatment – issues like addiction or depression are examined, including the testing of the controversial group of drugs known as SSRIs, of which Prozac is the most familiar. These are drugs that are prescribed to and used by humans in Britain and most of the world.

Of course, there are deaths. There are several thousand mice and rats in the facility, all of which are fed and watered in enclosures that are cleaned at least once a week by a dedicated staff. Rodents do not have a huge life expectancy and some develop medical issues. These are humanely put down with either a simple neck-breaking procedure or an overdose of CO2. The bodies are donated to a local reptile facility.

Often, it is growth patterns that interest the researchers – such studies are often useful for cancer research. They add a gene from a jellyfish which glows bright green under ultra-violet light, to certain parts of the body such as the brain or other organs. This allows researchers to better see what has or has not changed. Looking at some mice, glowing in the dark, they didn’t seem to me to be bothered by this addition to their bodies. Scientists do not think this harms them in any way, but it does raise the spectre of another side of the animal research debate: is it ethical to change the biological make-up of a living animal or is that playing God?

To follow up on this question I spoke to Dr Robert Kelsh whose work at the University focuses on the Zebra fish. He is a Professor of Stem Cell and Developmental Genetics, his work focuses on the neural crest which develops in embryos and helps to generate various elements of the body – the jaw, the nerves in the skin, parts of the bowel and pigmentation. After speaking to him, he took me to see the fish he studies. More specifically, he showed me the embryos – all their research is done in the first five days of embryonic development – because these embryos are incredibly visible. They are, in fact, see-through. You can quite literally watch skin pigment develop, cell by cell.

The work done in the fish facility is less intrusive than the work done with rodents. What they work with they can only see with microscopes. The embryos he showed me were alive and well, not even anaesthetised. But these are embryos, and the researchers are interested in stem cells: both of those things are controversial. Rightly or wrongly, such work might upset people, not because of the actual harm done to the animals in question (it should be noted that these fish are better looked after than most pet shop fish) but because of the powerful nature of genetic tampering. Should anybody, regardless of intent or effect, be altering something as basic as the genetic structure of an animal?

“I do not think that the changes we make in the course of our research are any more substantial than those made routinely by, for example, selective breeding. …[E]xperience tells us that the frequent outcome of our meddling in eco-systems is disruption of that eco-system, sometimes disastrously. But this is a new field, and one where active anticipation of these and other problems is being encouraged, and guidelines being drawn up to protect against this.”

Dr Kelsh and his team have the ability to keep up to thirty thousand fish – they are studied partly because of how small, easy to keep and easy to breed they are – but actually keep more like ten to fifteen thousand. “We don’t like to keep more fish than we need,” I am told. The adult fish are kept for breeding purposes only. As they age, they become less useful for breeding and so are euthanized with an overdose of anaesthetic. Other than this, no procedure is done on them after the first five days of their existence.

Much of the research is exciting, none more so, I think, than the study of pigment cells from Zebrafish to find drugs that inhibit the protein ALK, linked with cancer development. They noticed that screening embryos for drugs that decreased production of a certain type of pigment cell - iridophores, the ones that make fish scales shiny - highlights which drugs would stop ALK expressing cancer cells from developing into dangerous tumours. This is a cheap and easy idea for screening for treatments for several very dangerous cancers. It’s the sort of thing people tend not to get upset about.

It is conspicuous that animal rights groups and their associated literature mostly shies away from mentioning medical research done on animals. PETA list the following: “stopping the use of animals in cosmetics laboratories, agricultural research, dog and cat food trials, weapons tests, aerospace studies, and car-crash simulations”. As I prepared to write this article, I was ready to convince the relevant campus authorities to give me access not only to dispel myths but also to expose some of the fascinating medical work being done. What actually happened was I was met by some very proud professionals who were very keen to let the wider public know what they were working on. Despite this, I was told by some other experienced members of student media that as recently as five years ago, this article would have been a no go.

WHY NOW?
I asked some of the researchers what made them want to talk to bathimpact. Dr Sarah Bailey, Department of Pharmacy Pharmacology, had this to say “My personal view on why we should be open? The public fund a lot of medical research, through research councils and medical charities, much of which involves using animals. The vast majority of the public support animal research for medical purposes; this support depends to some extent on how we keep people informed about what we do. If scientists are not open then we may be viewed as having something to hide - and we don’t- the UK has the strictest legislation regulating animal research which places animal welfare at the centre of everything we do. That is important for all researchers. The University has recently signed up to the concordat on openness on animal research along with more than 40 other organizations.”

“We have always been open about our work, through the website and publications. We’re very confident that we work within very stringent guidelines - the UK legislation is more so than those of any other country I have worked in or discussed with colleagues. And our fish are more healthy than, for example, many you can freely buy in pet shops!”

There will always be people who regard any animal research as ethically wrong, just as there are people who regard eating meat as ethically wrong. For me, the whole issue is more complicated than any blanket judgement of right or wrong. The regulations seemed to be incredibly strict, the actual conditions of the animals were, as far as I could see, near impeccable and all the individuals involved had considered, long and hard, what they did and how they did it. To ignore these extra factors seems like wilful ignorance.

Hopefully, this article has shed some light about what actually happens with animal research on campus and dispelled some myths. Fear not for your pets, these researchers are dedicated scientists just like, no doubt, many of you wish to be.

With thanks to Will Marsh and Vicky Just as well as the researchers involved. If you would like to comment about animal research on campus please email impact-editor@bath.ac.uk

Written by Dan Phillips

University of Bath Students’ Union President, Chris Clements, is set to stand for election to the block of 15 on the National Union of Students (NUS) National Executive Council (NEC).

The primary purpose of the NEC is to ensure that NUS is fulfilling the policy mandates from National Conference. It also sets emergency policy, resolves conflicts and prioritises the work and resources of the organisation. Block of 15 is a voluntary position.

Speaking of his nomination, Clements commented “I think it is vitally important that Bath SU actively involves itself in the decision making of the NUS to ensure its work is relevant to our students. At times NUS can seem dominated by factions and I hope to bring a sensible voice to the discussions at NEC”.

The role also includes acting as a liaison between students unions and the NEC. On this, Clements added “I hope to encourage member unions to not only share and discuss national issues at an officer level but also speak to everyday, uninvolved students about the issues they are facing”.

Clements’ manifesto largely focuses on the need to support activities groups, where the majority of involvement in Students’ Unions comes from. It also has a focus on the need to effectively communicate the work NUS does both on campaigning and on supporting Students’ Unions to the wider membership.

The position will be voted on alongside the full time positions at National Conference in April. Any student or full time officer of a member Students’ Union is eligible to run or nominate others for the positions. Bath SU officers have nominated individuals for 3 of the 6 President and Vice-President positions.

Photo Credit: Darius Gilani

Dear Professor Science,

My “friend” is running an election campaign at the moment and “they” were wondering if there is anything that “they” could use to help “them” in their efforts to drum up votes?

Mr. W. Clinton

I shall split today’s question into two parts. Firstly is against all rules, pure and simple – rig the election. I’m assuming, for no reason whatsoever, that the election your “friend” is running for is going to have online votes counted by a computer on a newly made website full of possible security exploits. I would use “hacking” and just rig the election. Good examples of how to “hack” can be found in programs such as CSI:Miami.

However, there are plenty of ways to legitimately sway people’s opinions without actively cheating.

What you have to consider is this: humans, despite common belief to the contrary, are not rational beings and are affected by social cues much more habitually than anyone would care to admit!

Thus, my first advice is to paint yourself as empathic to everyone. Try talking to people and pretend to understand their pains and grievances. Whether or not you actually follow up on this is irrelevant; paint yourself as a much more important part of everybody’s social group than your contender and you should be gravy. You should also find it useful to demonise your opposition; if you say they hate all members of any circus then they are far less likely to receive votes from members of the circus!
The term that I like to use is the personality cult. You need to become the opinionary epicentre of your group. If you can produce a group of people who look to you for how to think, much in the way that celebrities are “role models”, then they are indeed very likely to turn out to vote!

This segues nicely into my next point about our being emotion animals. People are much more likely to vote if they are voting against someone they feel strong dislike for than someone for whom they feel a strong affinity. You could use this to your advantage as negatively campaigning is thus very effective at causing people to vote against your opposition (and thus for you!).

People are also very social - despite my best efforts with Dungeons and Dragons and not showering, I keep having to talk to people. It’s disturbing. Anyhow, you should attempt to make yourself seem as though you are going to be the winner. Get yourself a maven and improve your image from what it is already. Due to a psychological effect imaginatively named the bandwagon effect people like to vote for who they think will win in order to be able to say that they picked the winning side.

The other thing you must remember is that people approach politicians they know nothing about in much the same way they approach normal people they have never met - first impressions really do count and it is almost always essentially love or hate at first sight!

Therefore, Mr. Clinton, the very best advice I can give you is to vilify the shit out of your opponent!

Photo Credit: dilmarouseff

Written by Norton Yeung

Brazil, Russia, India and China – four up-and-coming economic powers –predicted by Goldman Sachs to dominate the world economy by 2050. Out of the BRICs, Brazil, India and China (BIC) are especially interesting as nations with no prior statuses as superpowers. China, with its double-digit growth over the past three decades, is emerging as the challenger to the American world order. India, with its rapidly growing service sector, follows closely with the world’s largest democracy. But the Macaw is preparing itself with its balance of industry and natural resources. So who will emerge dominant amongst the BIC?

First we have China, long considered ‘a sleeping giant’ in the words of Napoleon, which most would agree no longer is the case. It is currently the second-largest economy in the world. Although the recession has meant that its robust economy has stopped growing in the astonishing double digits, China still managed to maintain 9.2% growth for the last four years, towering over fellow BRICs. Growth also attracted more foreign investment than any other BRIC in 2011, putting it second only to America. This in turn spurs further growth, all the while bringing in technological know-how and driving infrastructural improvements.
The growth has also come with many perks, most notably in education. The cheap, low-skilled labour force is enjoying better access to education – China is speculated to become the world’s largest English-speaking country in ten years time. The end-product is an impressive improvement in competitiveness, equipping China’s traditionally industrious labour force, with new skills. The Tiger and the Macaw appear to have no choice but to bow before the Dragon’s might.

Not according to the US though. The National Intelligence Council stated that double-digit growth is not sustainable for any nation in the long term, and ‘by 2020 (China’s) economy will probably be expanding by only 5%’For such a case, the NIC warns that China risks becoming ‘trapped in middle-income status’. That would spell the end for China’s quest for the superpower title. Pile that risk on top of the ever-growing demand for imported energy, a rapidly-aging population, a shrinking workforce, suffocating pollution and brewing domestic calls for democracy in the one-party state, and the mighty Dragon appears to be just a straw away from having his back broken.

What’s more, the Tiger is hot on its heels. By purchasing power parity, India is the third biggest economy. Like China, India takes advantage of cheap labour to gain an edge - and just like China, this comparative advantage has attracted much outsourcing of industry from the West.
But there is one important edge that India has over its fellow BRICs: entrepreneurship. India’s democratic and economically-liberal institutions are by definition more entrepreneur-friendly. In contrast, China’s system is one of control – both political and economically. In short, as Harvard Business School Professor Khanna puts it, ‘China has shackled its independent business people. India has empowered them.’ Independent innovation, crucial in ‘soft’ industries (e.g. advertising, software, biotechnology), is in abundance in India. Although China still maintains a significant edge over India in the traditional ‘hard’ industries, the global trend is leaning towards India’s advantage as ‘soft’ industries come into prominence. With this competitive advantage, the Tiger may well speed past the Dragon.

This is, however, outweighed by India’s problem of mass poverty. Whereas China’s growth from 1990-97 reduced absolute poverty by 20%, India’s boom, having started a decade later, has done relatively little for the poor. The World Bank reported that in 2010, 68.2% of India’s population remained under the $2 mark of daily income – the highest proportion of poverty amongst the BRICs. In addition, the Tiger also suffers from the same issues facing the Dragon. To quote the NIC report again, such ‘problems and traps’ include ‘inequities between rural and urban sectors’ and ‘increasing constraints on resources such as water’.

To the Macaw, however, resource constraints are not a problem. Brazil differs from India and China; it is a huge exporter of natural resources (especially soy, iron ore and oil). Riding on the increasing exploitation of resources, Morgan Stanley declared Brazil as the world’s largest emerging market in February 2008, outshining India and China in terms of stocks available for foreign investors. What’s more, according to Graham Underwood, director of investment firm GFT UK, Brazil enjoys other advantages: a more ‘respectable corporate governance’ regime, a more ‘sustainable supply of well-educated people’, and it is geographically better-placed to trade with the US and Europe. Poverty has also been tackled; under the ‘bolsa familia’ programme, poverty was reduced by 40%. With such balance, Brazil is well-equipped to be the only BRIC able to sustain competition in manufacturing, services, and resource supplying simultaneously. Indeed PwC recently forecast Brazil to overtake Russia by 2050 to become the 4th largest economy.

That said, sadly, in the world of economic competition (as in life), size does matter, a lot. Brazil’s economy, at some $2,178 bn, is a mere fraction of China’s $ 11,316 bn, and less than half of India’s $4,469 bn. The Macaw has been growing slower than other BICs, trudging along at a painful 2.7% as of 2011. In terms of infrastructure, Brazil is severely lacking. What’s more, the Majestic Macaw is apparently less attractive to foreign businesses, being named 126th out of 183 in the World Bank’s ‘Ease of Doing Business’ rankings.

Out of the three, China, as things stand today, is significantly better-placed to emerge dominant. This is due to three key factors. Firstly, the Dragon has a decade’s head-start over the Tiger and the Macaw. With the ongoing economic crisis, it is very unlikely that India or Brazil will be able to close that gap in the foreseeable future. Secondly, the prospect of slowing Chinese growth and its potential impact on domestic stability can be outweighed by the expansion of China’s domestic market. The Economist recently stated, ‘2013 may… be the year that China’s services sector officially eclipses industry’. Once this important prerequisite is achieved, risk of domestic dissent would be minimised, giving the regime space to solve other issues undermining economic potential. Finally, China maintains constant trade relationships with most of the world, which, despite regional territorial tensions, have remained stable. While some parts of the world are still yet to establish solid commercial links with Brazil or India, China already has a foot in the door; it has become an indispensable part of world trade. As it stands now, China is stronger externally than India or Brazil as an economic power. Nonetheless, it is important to bear in mind that this verdict is based on observations at the present day. Change, however, can, and will, come from within. When it does, the Dragon’s chances of becoming the next superpower will ultimately rest with its people.

Photo Credit: theps

Everything has roots, including stereotypes. The Jews are stingy because they dealt money, one of the few trades they could get away with during the Diaspora. Blacks are criminals, because discriminatory employment and economic procedures pushed them to the brink of society and often into moments of desperation. The French are smelly because the only eat cheese, the Chinese good at maths because of a rich history of advanced science and education. Stereotypes are therefore often – but not always – based on some element of truth, a truth which when taken seriously causes fierce divides in society and the corruption of a basic capitalist principle: competition.

It may seem that an economic recession might exacerbate racism in society, but this hasn’t happened to the extent seen in the past. Whilst racism is a deep-rooted hate of someone based on ethnicity and ancestry, xenophobia is a fear of cultural outsiders; something which might be more applicable to our current society. At the height of the recession, the BNP was bankrupt as it seemed the party had misjudged the ‘ethnic Brits’ attitudes to people of different race. Meanwhile, UKIP – still bigoted, but certainly less bothered by ethnicity – stormed the recent by-elections in Eastleigh to take second place ahead of the Conservatives. It seems that at times of economic downturn, people are less bothered by race, but more so by outsiders.

Now I will be the first to tell you that we, as a nation, do not work hard enough to keep up with the changing world. This doesn’t stop us, driven by the hatemobile that is the British tabloid press, from having pretty opinionated theories as to why immigrants and minorities are awful. ‘They just come here to steal our money’, ‘they took are jobs’, ‘this is a Christian country, despite that fact I am not a Christian or care that much, I’m just annoyed that they being treated equally’ etc. The fact is that legal immigrants give far more to the economy than they take out, are less likely to apply for benefits and, with every 1% increase in immigrants, our economy takes a nice 7% boost in GDP. Immigrants are, in fact, pretty awesome.

So why the hate? Why would we be willing to lose out economically in exchange for shallow-minded, racist opinions and why would the government and press not do more to discourage it? Some claim it is a psychological thing, but unfortunately it most likely isn’t as simple as that. Economists from Adam Smith to Milton Friedman have claimed that organic competition is key to success, so it baffles that ‘big business’ is so keen to avoid an influx of cheap labour. Becker claims that racism and xenophobia works for both sides; the workers and the bosses. Whilst workers feel like they’re not going to lose their jobs, the bosses can use anti-immigration mentalities as a way to keep their workers happy. And by bosses, I mean politicians.

If economics was as important to politicians as politics is, the world would be a much safer place. We don’t need to look far back in history to see what happens when leaders mix institutionalised racism, economics and politics.

TG: First up, can you tell us a little bit about yourself and your EP?

JB: I’m Joanna, a recent Sociology and Social Research graduate from the University of Bath and I release music under the name of That Joanna Bradshaw. I’m releasing my first EP, ‘As Promised…’, on the 11th March and the type of music that I play is acoustic/folk and it tries to tell stories through the music from my experiences and it’s meant to try and help others who might have been in a similar situations. I’ve been writing songs since he age of 10 and I’ve just always loved music, I did a lot of choir and musical theatre when I was younger and know I write my own songs.

TG: What was the recording process?

JB: I worked with a producer named Andy Cooke who also runs the Bath Open Mic Nights here. He’s a lovely guy and we worked on it all together.

TG: What would you say have been your main influence?

JB: I guess I’ve always listened to people like Adele and Damien Rice who tell stories and try to make the most out of bad situations by writing songs and get something good out of it.

TG: You’ve also got Skinny Love, any reason why?

JB:Skinny Love is just one of my favourite songs, and lyrically it’s just beautifully haunting. It’s also kind of my boyfriend and I’s song, so that’s also kind of why I picked it for my first EP.
You’ve also got a big launch party for it coming up in Bath haven’t you? Could you tell us about that?

JB: It’s on the 16th of March and it’s from 8pm to 11pm. Free admission, so I really want people to come because it’s the more the merrier really. It’s at Jikka Jikka which is on George Street. There’s live music throughout the evening from artists such as Lily Stokes, Andy Cook, DJ B and his girls, and Carousels and Cuisines who have also just released their EP and they’re a fantastic band, so I highly recommend coming down..

Written by Holly Narey

The man in B25 looks like he is about to die. Pallid,
gaunt, with an unhealthy sheen betraying the battle
of conflicting temperatures within him, each breath
he lets juddering out of his lungs is followed by a tense
pause as all around him doubt slightly that it will ever
be followed by another creaking inhalation. As he shuffled
down the aisle, clutching his ticket and peering at it
through what I seemed like a hazy fog of airborne bacteria,
I had realised with dread that of course, he was for me.

My commute is an experience I have carefully manipulated
to make bearable; I have my laptop before me on the
table, my coffee behind it to the left and croissant in line
to the right. I buy my coffee, extra hot, five minutes before
boarding. It warms my hand on the platform. When I get on
the train it sits there, cooling, as I stare at my empty Word
document. I blink slowly at it. The insertion point blinks
back. I pick at my croissant, tearing strips off one at a time.
Approximately fifteen minutes into my journey I allow myself
a game of solitaire, and by then my coffee has cooled to
a gentle warmth despite the efforts of the Styrofoam cup.
It fights a losing battle, as do I. I drink my coffee, finish
my scraps of pastry and icing sugar, disembark and walk
the few hundred metres to my office, to my cubicle, where
I will spend the day entering data, printing data, emailing
data and shredding data. I will create nothing. I will leave
work, stare at my laptop screen for another half hour on
the journey home, creating nothing, and then will arrive to
my empty flat and consume dinner, consume half a bottle
of wine and consume some inane drivel on the television.
I contribute nothing, I am a passive cog in the machinery
of this city, being pushed by parts much stronger than I.

The man falls into the seat opposite me, pulling a ream
of tattered toilet paper out of his sleeve, mopping his forehead
and then stemming the flow from his nose. Revolting.
I shift my croissant towards me, away from the radius of
his noxious breath. He breathes slurpily through his mouth
and settles. I blink at him. He blinks out the window. The
insertion point blinks at me. Each flash a reminder of the
hours wasted in an inability to turn ideas into words on
a page. My brain has atrophied, new links between neurones
slowing to a stop, my mind is closing to new ideas. I
should have done this writing when I was younger, when I
could daydream for hours, now I have solitaire and writer’s
block.

He sneezes. It is a thing of majesty. My eyes widen with
horror at the sight of his recoil, knowing what will inevitably
follow. His face, before so lifeless and flaccid, now
tightens, his nose scrunching up towards his now screwedup
eyes, his head turning to face the ceiling. At the crest
of the wave his mouth opens to reveal a look of misery
and surprise, and then he leans forward, lifting his hand
to stem the torrent that will surely follow. It is a noise to
topple cities. The windows rattle. His old rags of tissues
don’t stand a chance, tattered loo roll flaps in the gale that
is emitted from his nose and mouth. I feel droplets on my
face, in my widened, terrified eyes. I give my croissant up
for dead. My heart sinks; I know what is in store for me. My
future is sat in front of me, mopping up mucous and humiliation.
I want to scream at the injustice of it all; instead
I get up, pack up my things (leaving the contaminated croissant
and coffee) and move to the door as the train slows
to my stop. I walk straight to the station toilets and scrub
my hands, my arms, even my face. I take my laptop out of
its case and wipe the cover with soap and dry it with paper
towels. I stare into the mirror and breathe deeply, willing
myself to fight the infection that in my fear I imagine I can
already feel spreading through my veins and arteries, my
nervous heart rate pumping what I imagine as a slick black
ooze through my body ever the faster. I pack up my laptop
again and walk to work.

I am a bag of nerves the rest of the day. I doodle on
the desk, the fake wood texture beneath my paper distorting
my pen movements. Stars turn into dancing men, with
jerky triangular limbs, the faces I try to draw are warped to
display unintended emotions. I feel myself clouding over.
In my break I go to the bathroom and spend ten minutes
staring at my face in the mirror, trying to work out whether
I am actually going paler by the second, and if so whether
it is due to anxiety or disease. The answer comes at lunch,
when my tuna and sweetcorn sandwich re-emerges after
a few short minutes. As I lift my face away from where it
rests heavily on the edge of my bin, blinking away from the
harsh office lights that seem to have taken on the ferocity
of the sun, I vaguely register my boss stood over me. “Jesus
Christ, go home”. I don’t bother to respond. My coat is
already on and I’m stumbling towards the door.

I don’t even remember the journey home. The next
thing I know I’m sat at my desk in my flat, my laptop in
front of me, searching for my symptoms to find out if I’m
dying. The internet, of course, says yes, but as it cries leukaemia
and tumours for even the slightest headache I try
to remain calm. As I read, I sneeze eight times in a row, I
wipe the cold sweat from my brow and my streaming eyes,
staunching a flow of ectoplasm impressive enough to thrill
Victorian society. I feel like I am seeping ice out of every
pore, this is more than the flu, my brain is fiery and frenzied
in thought. Sufficiently terrified, I fill a jug of water,
place it next to the bed, close the curtains (has the sun ever
been so bright?) and collapse into bed. In the darkened
room I feel as though I can almost see figures coming out
of the wall. I touch my forehead and the heat seems to burn
my hand. I sleep.

I wake. I have no idea how long I’ve slept for, was it
hours? It feels longer somehow, it’s as though I remember
time passing even though I was not actively participating
in it; my head is clearer but I feel exhausted, drained, like
someone has pulled a plug at the back of my brain. Oh my
head is heavy. I am surprised to discover that I am sat upright,
in a chair, not in the bed where I am sure I spent
my fevered sleep. I can remember hazy dreams, people and
places, harshly bright and gleamingly real. My hand is resting
on the keyboard, typing full stops ad infinitum on my
formerly blank Word document. I raise my hand to grip
the mouse, every movement an effort. I’ll delete all of this
and leave it as it was, bring back the empty page that reflects
my incapability of achieving anything of significance,
it may as well be a list of my valuable achievements. Ha. I
click and drag, selecting the lines of dots. Going through
pages and pages of these taunting symbols of finality until…
words. On page eighty two I reach words. It is a story;
beautifully written, touching and funny and real. In it I see
hints of the things I almost remember from my fevered
dreams, people and scenarios, along with ideas I had toyed
with over the years in my hours of daydreaming at the office,
things I would one day make into my masterpiece; my
masterpiece that is right here sat before me… at least some
of it is. I sit and read from the start to the finish. Or rather,
not the finish – I read until the last sentence but it’s clearly
not the end. There is no resolution, no closure. It doesn’t
even work as a cliff-hanger.

To be continued